| Off Topic > Off Topic |
| Kids and politics |
| << < (86/117) > >> |
| Inv3rted:
--- Quote from: Snackbar on October 08, 2009, 09:11:10 PM ---Good job selectively reading Wikipedia articles. Try reading the last paragraph of the section you just mentioned. Yeah because that's the majority of the old testament. Don't try and wiggle your way out of this one, smartass. By the way, Richard Dawkins has never seriously studies or read the Bible. "Would you need to read learned volumes on Leprechology before disbelieving in leprechauns?" Since Richard Dawkins wrote that, I think that you don't know an awful lot about him. Considering I've read two of his books and watched many of his lectures, I wouldn't say I know much either. That page says nothing about his reading of the Bible. He said that he had not read books by many theologians, which is totally different. Your point is still invalid. Go read a history book, and preferably retake that middle school curriculum on the scientific method. Furthermore, Dawkins actually values the Bible as a piece of literature, which I think you may find hard to believe. I value it as literature too. There are plenty of dark stories which are great literature. But the fact is, if you see any value beyond that, there is a problem. What if I saw some great truth of the universe about the morals presented in the movie Inglorious Basterds? I can appreciate the movie without appreciating the morals. --- End quote --- |
| Inv3rted:
--- Quote from: Rughugger on October 08, 2009, 09:18:57 PM ---Having passion for something and just being a richard are two different things. You obviously can't tell the difference. And since you see fit to constantly throw a jab at me only shows me you are losing an argument and have to try and redirect my attention to your lack of productive discussions. Losing an argument? I have laid many valid points out that no one has even bothered to refute directly. I bring your parents into the argument because they are responsible for teaching you throughout your young life. The fact that they obviously haven't taught you respect for other people and their beliefs is not the main goal here, but I'm sure they have their reasons for allowing you to be your fowl-mouthed self. I am unaware as to how I can have a fowl mouth, but I'll go with it. As I said, they taught me to be secular. Because of the passion I have developed, I have become more aggressive in my beliefs. But I do not wish any harm to you; I wish to try and knock some sense into your head. And you speak of religion as the basis for all civilization going to stuff. Same argument, different subject matter. Welcome to hypocrisy. So you can also "forget off with your 'I wasn't happy til I dumped religion.' bullstuff." Not so good when it turns right back onto you, is it? Way to be a dumbass. I told you your point was invalid because I presented the exact opposite argument. I was not trying to claim any sort of validity in the argument about personal feelings based on belief. That's a very poor thing to resort to, and you did it. There is a big difference between religion's effect on society and religion's effect on mood. I called you out on your handicapped statement, and the best your wise old mind can think of was that? Good job. PS, Jesus still loves you even if you don't believe in him. Have a nice day. :) Not according to the Bible. --- End quote --- |
| Rughugger:
--- Quote from: Inv3rted on October 08, 2009, 09:26:24 PM ---Losing an argument? I have laid many valid points out that no one has even bothered to refute directly. Which have been countered with equally refutable counterarguments, you just dismiss them because it's religious. I am unaware as to how I can have a fowl mouth, but I'll go with it. As I said, they taught me to be secular. Because of the passion I have developed, I have become more aggressive in my beliefs. But I do not wish any harm to you; I wish to try and knock some sense into your head. You obviously haven't proofread any of your responses then. I see foul language in all your replies, all directed at people who have an equal passion for their beliefs as you claim to have in yours. Way to be a dumbass. Oh noes, foul language! I told you your point was invalid because I presented the exact opposite argument. I was not trying to claim any sort of validity in the argument about personal feelings based on belief. That's a very poor thing to resort to, and you did it. There is a big difference between religion's effect on society and religion's effect on mood. I called you out on your handicapped statement, and the best your wise old mind can think of was that? Good job. Then why bother to prove a point that has no validity? Kinda pointless, isn't it? And that response wasn't directed at you, or didn't you notice the "Bisjac" at the start of that? Sounds like someone is desperate for arguing material because they're running out of Wikki resources. Not according to the Bible. You're reading the wrong material then. --- End quote --- |
| Snackbar:
Perhaps we have two different definitions of the Old Testament. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. After all, you've never read the Bible. How is my point invalid? Even if he has read parts of the Bible (and he clearly hasn't read it thoroughly, thanks to several rather large mistakes he has made), he still hasn't read up on his facts, because he still makes wrong assumptions about the Bible. You value it as a piece of literature, yet you say "you only need to read a few passages to see what utter crap this piece of literature is"? I'm sorry, but I think those two statements are incongruous. --- Quote ---And he is more qualified to discuss quantum physics than you are to discuss politics. --- End quote --- I believe you're giving Richard Dawkins quite a lot more credit than you ought. Besides, you're not even using the word politics correctly. I'm not talking about national policy here, I'm talking about why you should stop attacking Christianity like a one-man Inquisition. |
| Grumpy:
This converstation hurts my small brain |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |